Shape constancy from novel views

Prior experiments on shape constancy from novel views are inconclusive: Some show that shapes of objects can be recognized reliably from novel views, whereas others show just the opposite. Our analysis of prior results suggests that shape constancy from novel views is reliable when the object has properties that constrain its shape: The object has volumetric primitives, it has surfaces, it is symmetrical, it is composed of geons, its contours are planar, and its images provide useful topological information about its three-dimensional structure. To test the role of some of these constraints, we performed a set of experiments. Solid shapes (polyhedra) were shown on a computer monitor by means of kinetic depth effect. Experiment 1 showed that shape constancy can be reliably achieved when a polyhedron is represented by its contours (most of the constraints are present), but not when it is represented by vertices or by a polygonal line connecting the vertices in a random order (all the constraints are absent). Experiments 2 and 3 tested the role of individual constraints. Results of these experiments show that shape constancy from novel views is reliable when the object has planar contours and when the shapes of the contours together with topological information about the relations among the contours constrain the possible interpretations of the shape. Symmetry of the object and the topological stability of its image also contribute to shape constancy.

[1]  Zygmunt Pizlo,et al.  Perception of 3D scenes from pictures , 1998, Electronic Imaging.

[2]  Alex P. Pentland,et al.  From Pixels to Predicates: Recent Advances in Computational and Robotic Vision , 1986, IEEE Expert.

[3]  O. Reiser,et al.  Principles Of Gestalt Psychology , 1936 .

[4]  D. Perkins.  Visual discrimination between rectangular and nonrectangular parallelopipeds , 1972 .

[5]  Zygmunt Pizlo,et al.  A theory of shape constancy based on perspective invariants , 1994, Vision Research.

[6]  H H Bülthoff,et al.  Psychophysical support for a two-dimensional view interpolation theory of object recognition. , 1992, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[7]  S. Ullman,et al.  The interpretation of visual motion , 1977 .

[8]  Alexander V. Tikhonov,et al.  Ill-Posed Problems in Natural Sciences , 1989 .

[9]  Tomaso Poggio,et al.  Computational vision and regularization theory , 1985, Nature.

[10]  I. Rock,et al.  A case of viewer-centered object perception , 1987, Cognitive Psychology.

[11]  F. Attneave,et al.  The determination of perceived tridimensional orientation by minimum criteria , 1969 .

[12]  J HOCHBERG,et al.  The psychophysics of form: reversible-perspective drawings of spatial objects. , 1960, The American journal of psychology.

[13]  I. Biederman,et al.  Recognizing depth-rotated objects: Evidence and conditions for three-dimensional viewpoint invariance. , 1993 .

[14]  Kent A. Stevens,et al.  The Visual Interpretation of Surface Contours , 1981, Artif. Intell..

[15]  I. Biederman,et al.  Recognizing depth-rotated objects: evidence and conditions for three-dimensional viewpoint invariance. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[16]  Martha J. Farah,et al.  Orientation Invariance and Geometric Primitives in Shape Recognition , 1994, Cogn. Sci..

[17]  Neil A. Macmillan,et al.  Detection Theory: A User's Guide , 1991 .

[18]  Heinrich H. Bülthoff,et al.  Psychophysical support for a 2D view interpolation theory of object recognition , 1991 .